Lets Teach Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 271713645
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2018–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2024
- Location
- South Pasadena, CA, USA
- Phone
- 3236577891
- Rating
- 67
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Racquet Sports
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $60,696
- Expenses
- $47,641
- Assets
- $57,516
- Liabilities
- $4,313
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JOHN LETTS (PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- SCOTT HARRIS (DIRECTOR)
- JOHN LETTS (PRESIDENT)
- BRIAN TEACHER (SECRETARY)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Promote the game of tennis by subsidizing and providing support to youth tennis players, coaches and programs, providing financial support for public tennis facility improvements, and making distributions to other charitable or educational organizations that promote the sport of tennis
What it reported doing in 2025
Tennis outreach program to disadvantaged youth. Group clinics were offered at several different locations in southern California, approx 1,000 youths
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 67% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 47
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 58
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 42.8%; rating input score 43
- Program expense ratio: 54.5%; rating input score 54
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 21.5%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.21; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -18.2% per year; rating input score 0; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -12.2% per year; rating input score 0; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 15.2% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 42.8% of revenue deployed · 54.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $26K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2018 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
- People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 43/100.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 54/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 52/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 16/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.